Vol. 326 No. 3
asked the Minister for Finance how he expects to secure a reduction of £8,000 in the amount spent on travelling expenses and £30,000 on Post Office services by the Stationery Office in 1981; and if this will result in any diminution of the level of services to the public.
26.
asked the Minister for Finance how he expects to reduce expenditure on consultancy services by his Department by £14,000; the purposes for which the money was spent in 1980; and the plans for 1981.
27.
asked the Minister for Finance how he expects to reduce expenditure by £4,000 on last year's expenditure by the National Savings Committee.
With the permission of the Ceann Comhairle, I propose to take Questions Nos. 24 to 27, inclusive, together.
The detailed subhead information sought by the Deputy can more appropriately be raised when the group of Estimates for my Department comes before the Dáil. In the meantime, I should like to state that the allocations shown in the Book of Estimates conform to the overall allocations decided by the Government, and the necessary steps will be taken to ensure that they will not be exceeded.
How will the Office of the Minister for Finance cut travelling expenses in a year in which he, as Minister for Finance, increased petrol by 15p a gallon?
I think the subhead the Deputy is referring to is the Stationery Office, is that right?
Yes.
The allocation under this subhead was £108,000 in 1980 and £100,000 in 1981. I am satisfied that economies can be achieved in travelling and incidentals, and that subhead is not confined to just travelling. It covers other incidentals. The Deputy will have ample opportunity of going into the details of all these Estimates as we did last year. As a Government we made more time available than any recent Government for debating Estimates, even on a Friday.
How were travelling expenses and other incidental expenses exceeded last year in a manner that the Minister considers they can be reduced this year, particularly in view of the increasing costs of travel inflicted upon the motorists, civil servants and others by himself?
The Deputy obviously finds it hard to grasp the reply I have made and I do not intend to go into the details of the Estimates today. Travelling includes travelling and incidentals and I am going to insist that there will be economies in that part of the Vote in the coming year.
I have one final question. Does the Minister expect a diminution in the rate of prosecutions by the Director of Public Prosecutions which will enable him to save £5,000 on general law expenses or does he anticipate postponing cases until next year so that the money can be provided next year instead?
I am glad that the Deputy asked me that question and I will now give him the factual position. As I said earlier, the Deputy will get all the information he needs when Estimates time comes along. I will reply to his question now. The allocation in respect of the general law expenses subhead which covers expenditure on various expenses in legal cases, expenses of State solicitors and costs awarded against the State in the above Vote, was £15,000 in 1980 and £10,000 in 1981. In fact th expenditure in 1980 was about £10,000 and a repeat of this amount is estimated to be sufficient for 1981.
Could I ask the Minister why £15,000 appears in the Book of Estimates in view of the fact that the Book of Estimates is supposed to contain the actual amount spent last year, not the estimated provision?
The £15,000 appears in the Book of Estimates as the provision for 1980. The actual expenditure was about £10,000.
The Minister seems to be misinformed as to what is supposed to have been contained in the Book of Estimates.
A question, please, Deputy.
Is the Minister aware that the Book of Estimates in respect of the previous year is supposed to contain not the provision made at the outset of the year but the amount spent? If what the Minister is saying is correct then the Estimates volume was incorrect and he was responsible, therefore, for the publication of an incorrect volume.
The Deputy's research is not as good as he might have thought it was. The factual and actual outturn in 1980 was about £10,000.
Why then did the Minister say £15,000 in the Book of Estimates?
We are having a public debate on this now.
I would ask the Deputy to check his facts about the Book of Estimates. I am telling him that the factual and actual position is approximately £10,000 for 1980.
Ceist a 28.
Further evidence about the Book of Estimates being a bit out.
The Deputy's colleague's investigation is not going too well.
